Your Quad HD 2560x1440 Monitor Could Actually have an Ultra HD Resolution Panel

[Crosseyed92]

Quad HD monitors could actually be 4k panels limited by firmware. This appears to be a an attempt to save money by some manufacturers, creating high volumes of 4k displays could actually save them money over manufacturing individual quad hd and 4k monitors. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any way to update the firmware to run the display at full 4K, but it is interesting none the less.

 

Quote

The cost of producing a 27-inch 4K UHD panel (3840 × 2160 pixels) is now at least as expensive or even cheaper than producing a QHD panel (2560 × 1440 pixels). Depending on the volume order, a higher-resolution panel is simply installed in the event of supply shortages, as actually specified in the datasheet. However, the panel is then (and pardon the wording) castrated by firmware and displays a QHD resolution.

 

Source: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/your-quad-hd-2560x1440-monitor-could-actually-have-an-ultra-hd-resolution-panel.html

Original source (in German): https://www.prad.de/wolf-im-schafspelz-wenn-im-qhd-monitor-ein-4k-panel-arbeitet/

 

[sazrocks]

That doesn't make any sense. QHD doesn't scale perfectly to UHD, and thus displaying 2560x1440 on a 3840x2160 monitor would result in a blurry image.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

That doesn't make any sense. QHD doesn't scale perfectly to UHD, and thus displaying 2560x1440 on a 3840x2160 monitor would result in a blurry image.

If it's 27", it's hard to tell at first glance (I used to play games on my 4K monitor at 1440p and it doesn't really make a difference) and I'm sure most people won't notice it other than "it looks kind of off."

[i_build_nanosuits]

6 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

... I'm sure most people won't notice it other than "it looks kind of off."

which is already too big of a problem for this ''news'' to have any ground to stand on.

[Mira Yurizaki]

If anyone's interested, and if I remember, I could run this test pattern on my 4K monitor at 4K and 1440p and take a picture of both at the distance I normally would view the monitor at.

 

18 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

which is already too big of a problem for this ''news'' to have any ground to stand on.

There's also the issue that people may not be viewing the monitor at an appropriate distance anyway. I see a lot of setups where the monitor is back against the wall. I'm sure the desk has a depth of more than 2 feet. Which at that point the monitor is likely a wee bit too far for anything better than 96 PPI to be noticeable.

 

EDIT: Before someone tries to plot my murder, I'm not condoning this practice. I'm just pointing out why they think they can get away with this.

[ScratchCat]

13 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

If anyone's interested, and if I remember, I could run this test pattern on my 4K monitor at 4K and 1440p and take a picture of both at the distance I normally would view the monitor at.

Yes please, the article only seems to provide this low resolution image:

Native above, UHD to QHD below

[ScratchCat]

It is to note that the manufacturers say that one cannot flash the firmware of a 4K monitor to enable the 4K panel - this cannot be misunderstood as that it will be impossible to enable the 4K display.

Another point is that no models are explicitly mentioned, simply that this is based on information from sources "near panel producers" and will vary depending on demand. This would suggest that replacements will only be used if the supply level is critical which is probably uncommon.

[Mira Yurizaki]

22 minutes ago, ScratchCat said:

Yes please, the article only seems to provide this low resolution image:

Native above, UHD to QHD below

I found a larger resolution the image, but it looks like a closeup.

Spoiler

 

[Orcblood]

This reminds me of micro-processor fabing. If the processor isn't 100% functional still keep it but sell it as a lower end part. Indeed brilliant and doesn't bother me at all as long as there isn't a noticeable difference in quality for parts made specifically to be low end and those that were highend.

[DKL]

Sounds like NVIDIA needs to find a way to do this sort of thing with their leftover GPUS ;p

 

Really though, I don't think this news really makes even a pixel of difference. To the average consumer, it's ultra expensive to their wallet so it must be ultra quality.

[rawrdaysgoby]

ehhhh that is good? I guess

[Syntaxvgm]

there is no evidence of this. Not only does integer scaling (the only scaling that looks native and btw no gpus support for some fucking reason) not match this resolution, people always identify panels in their monitors. Its Right on the back lol just a few screws away

1440p on a 4k panel is crappy shit, believe me I've seen it. No matter what kind of scaling, text looks bad. Not a little bad, like low ratings on ever review like on amazon bad. It makes text truly garbage. 5k is the 1:4 resolution for 1440p, and why there's a 5k imac. 5k panels are fucking expensive compared to cheap 1440p these days

Im not saying it's impossible but I need to see more sources and panel numbers with m/ns or monitors involved. Typically, these controller boards are used on many different panels with a firmware made for the panel, but I need to see evidence of actual panels not what in the firmware

[orbitalbuzzsaw]

What? No. That's not how monitors work

[Mira Yurizaki]

So I got home and looked at a test pattern at a reasonably normal viewing distance (about 2.5 feet) and up close but... I may have to go reshoot these.

Spoiler

Pictures were taken at f/3.5, 1/100 shutter speed, ISO 160, with the focus point at the top left cross.

 

 

This one may fail as it may appear that the camera wasn't exactly stable during the shoot.

Though I also remember doing a random test like this with a game on the 4K screen a few years ago:

Spoiler

 

But looking at the 4K monitor at 2560x1440 otherwise, it feels more like there's subpixel antialiasing. The most surprising thing is that if the text is a bit larger, that is it's not like 10 point font, it still looks pretty good. For example I slightly prefer the way the Settings app on a 27" 4K panel set to 1440p looks compared to the native resolution because the native resolution text feels too sharp and harsh.

 

So again, while I can see why people would get upset about this, I can also see why a manufacturer thinks they can get away with it.

[Syntaxvgm]

34 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

So I got home and looked at a test pattern at a reasonably normal viewing distance (about 2.5 feet) and up close but... I may have to go reshoot these.

  Hide contents

Pictures were taken at f/3.5, 1/100 shutter speed, ISO 160, with the focus point at the top left cross.

 

 

This one may fail as it may appear that the camera wasn't exactly stable during the shoot.

Though I also remember doing a random test like this with a game on the 4K screen a few years ago:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

But looking at the 4K monitor at 2560x1440 otherwise, it feels more like there's subpixel antialiasing. The most surprising thing is that if the text is a bit larger, that is it's not like 10 point font, it still looks pretty good. For example I slightly prefer the way the Settings app on a 27" 4K panel set to 1440p looks compared to the native resolution because the native resolution text feels too sharp and harsh.

 

So again, while I can see why people would get upset about this, I can also see why a manufacturer thinks they can get away with it.

Its very noticeable even its well anti alaised, and the way its upscaled affects this a lot. Only really works for games and stuff

[bcredeur97]

so don't buy QHD panels anymore?

[79wjd]

31 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

so don't buy QHD panels anymore?

TBH I don't understand why people still buy QHD after 2015~ (high refresh rate excluded).

[lazypc]

I can relate through analogous fact of me having six-pack abs that are castrated by fat.

[WereCat]

1 hour ago, djdwosk97 said:

TBH I don't understand why people still buy QHD after 2015~ (high refresh rate excluded).

Because its really awesome middleground for screen size vs no need to use scaling and it is enough to have 2 windows opened at the same time unlike 1080p while not being nearly as demanding for games unlike 4k?

[DeScruff]

I feel like this would be done with low end 1440 monitors if anything.

Kinda reminds me of how there pretty much is no such thing as a 1280x720 LCD screen (except in the Nintendo switch). All "720p" TV's are actually 1366x768 - and yes it's noticeable.

[vanished]

This is so ridiculous and absurd I can't even believe it's real.  Anyone with even the slightest care for what they're seeing, which I assume would be everyone if you're bothering to get something over 1080p, would instantly see this looks like total shit.  This is about as logical as saying some octacore CPUs are actually just up-scaled hexcores, except that would be harder to notice.

[Kamjam21xx]

On 6/21/2018 at 3:35 PM, ScratchCat said:

It is to note that the manufacturers say that one cannot flash the firmware of a 4K monitor to enable the 4K panel - this cannot be misunderstood as that it will be impossible to enable the 4K display.

Another point is that no models are explicitly mentioned, simply that this is based on information from sources "near panel producers" and will vary depending on demand. This would suggest that replacements will only be used if the supply level is critical which is probably uncommon.

i wonder if you could purchase parts for a 4k display and just ignore that tid bit.

 

[ScratchCat]

3 hours ago, Kamjam21xx said:

i wonder if you could purchase parts for a 4k display and just ignore that tid bit.

Building your own display would certainly not be easy and only profitable or more cost effective on an industrial scale. Possible but unlikely.

[aenews]

I wonder if simply setting the higher resolution in Nvidia Control Panel would have any effect.  It seems not from what was stated in the article, but I wouldn't trust the statement from the unnamed manufacturer.  Even if not that simple, there may be a way to force the panel to run at the original resolution.